Wing Tsun is an absolute Joke

[wei-chi-student]

The good old: got video?
again...
Sounds good, but would be much enjoyable visualised (not that I wouldn't believe you)...
But what really caught my eye in your post is that - if I got you right - you're saying that this dude:
a./ did pretty well in sparring and
b./ fucked himself up while he wanted to show you a technique with you standing statically?
Sounds strange, although shit happens...

Anyhow, I wish -un-schools in general would spit out more people good in sparring and less good in showing static techniques...

Yah, a video would be great, but i guess you'll have to take my word this time.
He did pretty well in sparring, for a nOOb. His deflection worked about 50% of the time ( just covering up would have spared a few jabs in the face(light ones, it was his first sparring, i didn't try to maul him, and it would have been quite pointless, since i had approx 30kg on him)) Considering he spend 7 years in a striking art he was pretty bad (allthough -again- a really nice guy).
But then again, we sparred under boxing rules, thus he wasn't able to use all he got, but still 7 years are seven years, and he ought to have spend some of it striking with his hands.
Still his reflexes were good (strange enough he totally sucked at infighting, a distance where i -totally uninformed about _ing __un as i am- thought _ing __un could be usefull but he was so afraid to eat punches that he simply covered up totally and became a punching ball)

[wei-chi-student]

My point wasn't if _ing __un sucks or not, i wanted to give an exaple for the suckieness of compliance-only training, and i don't think we disagree on that tonuzaba. Thats why i didn't really comment on his sparring in my first post, only on the after-sparring-incident.

[wei-chi-student]

But what really caught my eye in your post is that - if I got you right - you're saying that this dude:
a./ did pretty well in sparring and
b./ fucked himself up while he wanted to show you a technique with you standing statically?

Meh, today i seem to need a lot of posts to really say what i mean:

a. during sparring he tried to box, this deflective movement was something that had been apparently drilled so often, that it happened subconsciously, he wasnt really trying to sparr as a _ing __un fighter. this may also explain his suckieness.

b. my point wasnt exactly that it was a static situation, but that i needed to comply to make it work, hell i'm glad he didn't try the whole techniqe during sparring, only the deflection, else he might have run into my right cross, and (patting myself on my back) that probably would have ruined that day for him.

[PPlate]

From "No Holds Barred: The History of Ultimate Fighting"

Zinoviev was left without an opponent, but Peretti matched him against wing chun exponent Steve Faulkner, who was originally supposed to face wrestler Paul Jones. As Zinoviev had hardly trained for (Orlando) Weit in the first place, he wanted an extra $25,000 to fight his new opponent, not knowing his strengths and weaknesses. The Russian slammed Faulkner to the mat and quickly gained a rear naked choke, forcing him to tap out.

Zinoviev recalled that Faulkner told him that he normally fought five on one, "so this should be easy." Before the show, a tape was shown of Faulkner sparring with multiple opponents. His moves were quick and complex. Against Zinoviev, he never got off a punch, kick or block.

[Tonuzaba]

My point wasn't if _ing __un sucks or not, i wanted to give an exaple for the suckieness of compliance-only training, and i don't think we disagree on that tonuzaba. Thats why i didn't really comment on his sparring in my first post, only on the after-sparring-incident.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely didn't see your post as an anti-WT attack, on the contrary, I view it as one of the rare examples of what I'm asking everybody here for - personal experience with the -un. So thank you.
I just wanted some clarification.
So any more details you gave are appreciated.
Boxers are very serious opponents and this -un-guy did the best thing he could - find out for himself.

[Sir Grossi]

Nonsense. The nature of BiuGee is to recover the center as fast as possible. It is meant as an idea of what to do when the shit hits the fan and you already screwed up. Your 'pinnacle' (what a horrible word choice) is actually found in the first two forms.

OK apologies for my poor choice of words and paraphrasing. Pinnacle would tend to
give an impression of importance. Everthing is equally important within Ving Tsun.

The third and final open hand form (Commonly Known as Biu Ji) Is the form where
more of the extreme striking methods are learnt.
(As well as Chum Jang or Gow Gup Sau - returning to the centre line)

Additionally the translation you are using is actually incorrect. BiuGee is actually a contraction of a longer poem 'Biu Chun Gee Nahm Jun'. The best translation of the form's contracted name I have found is 'Standard Compass'. This translation actually reflects better on the true nature of the 3rd form. (BTW, 'BiuSao' is the correct way to refer to your idea of 'flying/thrusting/deadly hands/fingers'.)

I was not looking for an argument over the correct roman translation
of a language that uses characters originally intended to be written only!
So many different variations can be found, based on subjective interpretation
of phonetics.

Anyway, in the context of Ving Tsun. Spellings from Yale University are;

Biu = Thrusting

Biu Ji = Thrusting Finger

Biu Sau = Thrusting Hand

Of course you will find references to the different techniques within
more than one form. THEY are built on each other and are not exclusive!

Then the obvious conclusion is that if it is not proven effectively and you cannot train it effectively, then it is senseless to use this and other similar techniques as the basis of what you consider as a 'pinnacle' of the style. If they are relevant at all, they are obviously minor adjuncts.

The intention of the post was to explain what I considered to be
the most effective elements of this style of self defence. ie to bring
about a conclusion with minimal effort.
And as such it would be pretty difficult to use these in a controlled
fashion such as a competition.

Using your definition, self defense would mean the use of weapons.

Yes, if they were available and to hand.

However, the style was created after the dawn of the age of gunpowder. Also, of the two weapons of the style, one was already obsolete (Long Pole) and the other is impractical for day to day carry (double short swords). Thus, if we are to use your definition of 'self-defense', the 'nun-who-must-not-be-named' style could not possibly be meant for this purpose, either.

I don't believe it was possible to pop down to Walmart and buy a firearm.
Poles and staffs would have been carried for utilitarian purposes (on long pilgrimages)
such as a walking aid. And therfore could be employed as a weapon.
Butterfly Knives are probably a development from a machete or similar.

We have Newbietown for introductions.

And? It's an option not a pre-requisite!

Since so much of the opinions you expressed are without a critical eye towards the subject matter, this is obvious... just as it is obvious to me the severe leaps of logic which were necessary for you to believe your own opinion in the first place.

Is that not called discussion? If I wanted to quote fact, I would have regurgitated
the Kuen Kuit! And perhaps like others, called it my own opinion!

To share from Ip Man's code of conduct;

hohk hei gau laahm dau

[Tom Kagan]

Everthing is equally important within Ving Tsun.

False.

The third and final open hand form (Commonly Known as Biu Ji) Is the form where
more of the extreme striking methods are learnt.

False.

Anyway, in the context of Ving Tsun. Spellings from Yale University are;

Biu = Thrusting

Biu Ji = Thrusting Finger

Biu Sau = Thrusting Hand

Look it up again ... assuming you even have the correct ideograms from which to work.

The intention of the post was to explain what I considered to be
the most effective elements of this style of self defence. ie to bring
about a conclusion with minimal effort.

Too bad that's a fantasy, but I hope it works for you.

And as such it would be pretty difficult to use these in a controlled
fashion such as a competition.

Bullshit. Assuming they are even important, your inability to figure out a way to do so is a failure of the imagination.

Yes, if they were available and to hand.

You talk some schtick about 'self defense', then turn around and rattlesnake corner yourself by a really dumb 'what if?' I'd say 'Self Deception' is more like it.

Poles and staffs would have been carried for utilitarian purposes (on long pilgrimages)
such as a walking aid. And therfore could be employed as a weapon.
Butterfly Knives are probably a development from a machete or similar.

Evidence? (Heck, I'll settle for some logic as to how you equated a 4 to 6 foot staff which can be wielded quite differently to the style's 8 1/2 to 14 foot pole.)

And, the style 'knives' descended from 'Willow Leaf Swords', not 'Butterfly Knives' and are totally unrelated to a how a machete developed.

Is that not called discussion?

No, actually what you are doing is called anti-process.

To share from Ip Man's code of conduct;

hohk hei gau laahm dau

Not only did Yip Man not write that, it's not his code of conduct. You are thinking of somewhere else.

Play again (Y/N) ?

[Sir Grossi]

Hi Tom

I don't think what I consider 'discussion' is the same as what you call anti-process
as I am willing to accept some of your well presented points.

If nothing else this thread has encouraged me to look for credilble sources
to back some of my 'outlandish' suggestions. And I thank you for that.

I accept that I can be somewhat journalistic, in my approach.
And it would therefore appear that I am quoting fact,
instead of expressing a point of view based on my 'limited'
knowledge. And particularly one based on my 'Brand' of Kung Fu.
And I have to admit I too seem to have been taken up with the
more 'romantic' notions of Wing Chun's History.

If the truth be told this has been quite a nice distraction from what
I should really be concentrating on.

I take it you did agree with some of my comments?? As they
were not ALL flamed:laughing1

In terms of what is considered Fact or Fiction, I was not there, so I can
not really comment. I guess We are all basing our knowledge about a
particular subject (Wing Chun) on many people's interpretations.
And it would appear, that this story has been 'adapted' to suit
the story teller's purposes.


However, a few facts do remain.

I consider a direct approach to self defence is neccessary
so if that means using a weapon (if availble at the time)
so be it.

(This can turn to shit if that weapon gets turned against you)

I consider a speedy conclusion to a situation preferable to
a drawn out encounter that could mean further jeapordy.

I consider the brand of Ving Tsun that I learned to essentially
be a nice little style. And I have futher developed those
skills with training in Krav Maga.

So in response to the original Thread Heading
'Wing Chun is an absolute Joke'
I dont think it is! But some people have turned into such!


Bye for now, and when we meet again I'll poke you eye out with my
fishing rod! (long pole used for utilitarian purposes)
:smile:

SG

[Virus]

I consider the brand of Ving Tsun that I learned to essentially
be a nice little style.

Sorry I haven't read much of this thread, but how did you evaluate that VT is a nice little style?
Do you use VT during sparring? Could someone trained in VT look at your sparring and say "yep, that's VT all right" if he had no prior knowledge of what style you did?

[Tom Kagan]

If nothing else this thread has encouraged me to look for credilble sources to back some of my 'outlandish' suggestions. And I thank you for that.

Getting people to do exactly that is one of my interests and is the main reason I am one of the harshest critics of the style here.

I accept that I can be somewhat journalistic, in my approach.
And it would therefore appear that I am quoting fact,
instead of expressing a point of view based on my 'limited'
knowledge. And particularly one based on my 'Brand' of Kung Fu.
And I have to admit I too seem to have been taken up with the
more 'romantic' notions of Wing Chun's History.

IMO, this is a good self-awareness realization.

I take it you did agree with some of my comments?? As they
were not ALL flamed:laughing1

Do not rule out the possibility that I ignore other parts for purely arbitrary reasons. :smile:
Given the way most of the 'chunners' post here, silence should be properly interpreted as sheer exhaustion over going through the same flawed arguments multiple times and trying to whack the person over the head to get them to have at least a spark of what you seemingly expressed in your last post. Out of all the __ng __un threads here, haven't you noticed practically none are smaller than 300 posts? That is inherently a sign of a greater problem within the style's practitioners, not just a 'LOL! Kung Fu!' troll fest.

In terms of what is considered Fact or Fiction, I was not there, so I can
not really comment. I guess We are all basing our knowledge about a
particular subject (Wing Chun) on many people's interpretations.
And it would appear, that this story has been 'adapted' to suit
the story teller's purposes.

Absolutely. This is why cross-checking is necessary. If it is true, it will also tend to be found in other places - and I don't just mean other __ng __un practitioners. And, if you can't find it in places both related and also unexpected, this is a huge red-flag of possible bullshido.

I consider a speedy conclusion to a situation preferable to
a drawn out encounter that could mean further jeapordy.

Not only is this not a unique interpretation, but it is true even in the ring. Your thoughts are a byproduct of effective training, not a primary focus. Truth be told, after 4-5 months of effective training, you should be able to already deal with 'the average asshole' and upwards of 99% of any and all situations you are ever likely to get in. Do you just leave it at that? If so, but you still train for more and more, you need to seriously reexamine why you continue to train. Life is too short to be so worried by this aspect of 'self-defense' that you spend your life preparing for a moment that most probably will never come along. IMO, 'Self-defense' is, hands down, the most limiting reason to train martial arts.

And I have futher developed those skills with training in Krav Maga.

I see you haven't really read the Bullshido shit fest thoughts on that style, either. :smile:

So in response to the original Thread Heading
'Wing Chun is an absolute Joke'
I dont think it is! But some people have turned into such!

I've repeated it before and I will repeat it again:

The 'nun-who-must-not-be-named' style will get respect when:

1. The elites of the style are competitive with the elites of other styles,
2. It shows a demonstrable increase in skill for the average practitioner,
3. it produces less dorks.

Until that happens, it deserves every last bit of criticism, both real and uncalled for, from the fighting community. To think otherwise, but still whine the style doesn't get that respect and is so misunderstood, is just another person failing test #3.

[Bye for now, and when we meet again I'll poke you eye out with my
fishing rod! (long pole used for utilitarian purposes)
:smile:

When not choosing to sit around all day in a dinghy and drink beer, the Chinese use nets for fishing. Carrying a fishing rod is not utilitarian. (and it isn't a __ng __un long pole, either.) It is, however, a convenient ruse used as an distraction to hide why your basket is void of fish and you are drunk off your ass. :smile:

[Virus]

I've repeated it before and I will repeat it again:

The 'nun-who-must-not-be-named' style will get respect when:

1. The elites of the style are competitive with the elites of other styles,
2. It shows a demonstrable increase in skill for the average practitioner,
3. it produces less dorks.

T3h r34l k0rr3ct.

[yanjin]

[kwoww]

If the post you're referring to isn't obvious, then please please please quote it for clarity's sake.

[M1K3]

If the post you're referring to isn't obvious, then please please please quote it for clarity's sake.

No, don't. Just let this thread die, we have had enuff _ing _un nutriding lately. The current levels are now toxic. * cough gasp, writer begins to bleed from the ears before exiting the thread *

[red_cloak]

Regarding your Wing Tsun Experience

grecco69,

Thank you for sharing your story. I have also come to the same conclusion about Wing Tsun. Unfortunately for me, however, it took me a little while longer to discover its cult-like operations. I hope you've parted company with your school and the association and have moved on to bigger and better things.